I know I'm focusing on the wrong thing here, but the moron really didn't think to take the condom out of the baby's mouth, yet still defends that he didn't do it and used a logic of "the 15 week old baby who probably couldn't hold her own head up, managed to crawl out of a bed, fall a couple feet without dying as a 15 week old baby, and then pick up and put a condom in her mouth, and choked to death on it."?

I fear for the future of the U.S.....we're seriously getting more retarded each day.

So CNN directs an angry mob to the wrong person's Facebook account and the mob notices that person (the wrong person...) liked Mass Effect. Since it's obvious that liking a video game is indisputable evidence that the game is the sole motivating factor behind any horrible acts of violence you (or in this case, someone else...) commit, the angry mob starts harassing Bioware telling them to burn in hell.

So CNN directs an angry mob to the wrong person's Facebook account and the mob notices that person (the wrong person...) liked Mass Effect. Since it's obvious that liking a video game is indisputable evidence that the game is the sole motivating factor behind any horrible acts of violence you (or in this case, someone else...) commit, the angry mob starts harassing Bioware telling them to burn in hell.

Yup, this is where society is at.

I seriously hope one day, a significantly important figure in government who helps resolve a disastrous problem using peaceful methods blames video games for his desire to avoid conflict. 23 years of playing video games and all I've ever wished to do because of them is heroic deeds.

My favorite is how of ALL fucking video games to blame for mass murder, they use Mass Effect 3, a game where you are trying to save the lives of galaxies worth of people. You go so far as to sacrifice yourself to end a conflict, but yeah, ME3 promotes killing innocent kids. He must have thought they were Volus, right?

Christ, that is ridiculous. I think it broke my stupidity meter, in fact. It reminds me of a conversation I had with my (self-described) hippie uncle a few months ago: He said that video games should be banned because they involve 'symbolic murder' and this encourages children to commit acts of real violence. I held my tongue because I was pretty sure that I wouldn't be able to avoid yelling if we got into that subject, but given that he's made his career as an actor and singer I seriously considered suggesting that plays and operas should be banned since those involve a form of 'symbolic murder' that will seem more real to an individual than any 'murder' in a virtual world.

I honestly think that people that suggest that we should ban video games -- or what the hell ever -- because that will theoretically reduce violence don't understand what that means. In the US, at least, bans are enforced by sending police to shoot up peoples' houses if they're suspected of possessing something banned. (Say, marijjuana.) I love the logic that says banning X *might* reduce violence, therefore we should order police to bring in anyone possessing it dead or alive thereby guaranteeing additional violence.

What's even better about it is that video games are just interactive forms of the tv shows we watch. In theory, tv is the culprit behind video games...and who controls tv? The same people who damn video games. Obviously, corporate bigwigs are tired of video games cutting in on profits to be made off network television.

It is an interesting angle. However I'd argue that the reason distributed denial-of-service attacks are not okay is that from a practical standpoint this is the same as physically denying entry to a place of business you are protesting. Which is not legal.